Big Coal: Inbreeding, Not Mining, to Blame for Birth Defects

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Last month, when coal execs read the report linking birth defects to mountaintop removal mining, they weren't exactly thrilled. One rebuttal, penned by four attorneys with the firm Crowell & Moring, which represents the National Mining Association, accused the study's authors of using cherry-picked and misleading data. But that apparently wasn't convincing enough, so they went a step further and employed a discredited stereotype about inbreeding in West Virginia.

"The study failed to account for consanquinity [sic], one of the most prominent sources of birth defects," the attorneys' statement said. It then went on to advertise the firm's services to coal companies looking to "counter unfounded claims of injury or disease" from potential lawsuits sparked by the study.

The statement, which had been on the firm's website for more than a week, was quickly removed yesterday after Charleston Gazette blogger Ken Ward Jr. pointed out its insinuation that inbreeding hicks, not mountaintop mining, were to blame for spikes in the rate of birth defects, which it also said didn't exist in the first place. Wrap your head around that one. (Thanks to Ward, you can still read the statement here.)

Ward asked one of the study's co-authors, West Virginia University's Michael Hendryx, to weigh in. His response:

The criticisms raised are to be expected. I disagree that we overstated our findings. I think we’ve been appropriately cautious in what we say about limitations of the study and conclusions. This paper can’t be considered in isolation but should be taken with the more than dozen other studies that continue to document serious health problems related to mining.

The four lawyers didn't get back to Ward, but a spokeswoman from the National Mining Association did, telling him that she didn't think anyone was really implying that a failure to look at inbreeding rates discredited the study. Maybe not, but the incident certainly won't sit well with opponents of mountaintop removal mining in Appalachia.

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/07/mountaintop-removal-inbreeding-coal-mining

[slim 1,514]

Well, if they're going to pick an excuse the rest of the country might buy, this is the one to go with.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Well, if they're going to pick an excuse the rest of the country might buy, this is the one to go with.

I had my money on hypoxia caused by breeding at altitude and errant plastic shopping bags and concomitant brain damage caused by low levels of oxygen during gestation as well as moonshine.

[Zero Sum 305]

I had my money on hypoxia caused by breeding at altitude and errant plastic shopping bags and concomitant brain damage caused by low levels of oxygen during gestation as well as moonshine.

Ain't that double hypoxia?

Damn.

[slim 1,514]

I had my money on hypoxia caused by breeding at altitude and errant plastic shopping bags and concomitant brain damage caused by low levels of oxygen during gestation as well as moonshine.

That would never "sell" to the masses. Remember, when tricking the dummies into believing your BS you have to have something based on a stereotype because "nobody believes those" and when they try to argue against your obviously stereotyped findings you can simply call them the makers of that stereotype.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

There is definitely more incest than coal mines in that region.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There is definitely more incest than coal mines in that region.

That does seem to be the East Coast trend, even in the big cities. Genetic selection, I guess, wanting to keep things closer to home, rather than wandering across the great divide in search of strange places to put your stuff.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Ain't that double hypoxia?

Damn.

Alpha chains, Beta Chains, Gamma Chains, Tire Chains, what's the difference?

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

There is definitely more incest than coal mines in that region.

Really?

http://www.slate.com/id/2192830/

"For the record, West Virginia has strict anti-incest laws. Only adopted cousins are allowed to marry, while in Vermont, Virginia, and many other states, first cousins can tie the knot."

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Really?

http://www.slate.com/id/2192830/

"For the record, West Virginia has strict anti-incest laws. Only adopted cousins are allowed to marry, while in Vermont, Virginia, and many other states, first cousins can tie the knot."

There are no coal mines in Vermont.

Are you suggesting there is no incest of they cannot marry each other?

Edited July 13, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

There are no coal mines in Vermont.

Are you suggesting there is no incest of they cannot marry each other?

Come on. Play along here and pretend like reading comprehension is not new to you.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Come on. Play along here and pretend like reading comprehension is not new to you.

What is the point? WV needs a law against incest and Vermont does not? Your post has nothing to do with the incidence of incest only at what level a state feels they need to regulate marriage for public health reasons. Vermont has no need to regulate such things. We also do not have laws regulating dinosaurs. So what?

Edited July 13, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

You know how the boys in West Virginia get circumcised ? By kneeing their sisters in the jaw. ZING!

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

What is the point? WV needs a law against incest and Vermont does not? Your post has nothing to do with the incidence of incest only at what level a state feels they need to regulate marriage for public health reasons. Vermont has no need to regulate such things. We also do not have laws regulating dinosaurs. So what?

So..........if you want to play that way..........

I guess we could say your completely ridiculous statement is cancelled by my completely ridiculous statement?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You know how the boys in West Virginia get circumcised ? By kneeing their sisters in the jaw. ZING!

But they cannot marry her, hence...no incest